My corparate run lab is better
My corparate run lab is worse
My lab hasn't changed
I like the two topics you bring up... the second being the purpose of this thread. So you noticed no change in service turnaround quality credits etc?Originally Posted by For-Life
As for the first part I think that I have observed that corp labs dream of being run like independants. Its really their goal, hence they are not what they are trying to be.
But maybe someone out there thinks differently than I. And hence, the poll goes on!
Well one the biggest problem with thriving businesses is that they grow so big that they loose touch with their customer. Ultimately, this leads to killing a lot of growing business. So that is why a lot of growing businesses are trying to keep the independent feel.
When we pick our labs we usually pick them based on service, quality, turnaround, and a little price (it is pretty competitive out there). We also develop a relationship with that lab, so when a corporation purchases that lab it is stupid for them to kill that off. Actually, a corporation shouldn't be buying a lab for the machinery, customer list, or location. They could buy and develop that themselves. They should buy it for the success of that lab, and the people who work there. So Essilor buys a lab they should make sure that the lab is run just like it was before the purchase. This is where they should empower the former lab owner now lab manager to make the decisions regarding the lab. It is actually a rather new technique, but companies who use it do rather well. I am glad to see with my lab that it happens that way. I used to deal with two labs, one of them got very sloppy, now I deal with one. So I do expect a lot, and in this case it has played out well. However, as I have read, in other cases they haven't done that and it has turned out bad.
A corporate lab will run their old equipment into the ground to please shareholders and that is the exact reason why a corporation does not have useable resources. They have to show the expected profit margin and will cut whatever it takes to get there.
I'd have to disagree with this statement- based on observation and the fact that shareholders are interested in profitability. Long-term profitability only results when the infrastructure of the business remains solid. Also, a very LARGE segment of the ownership in several "corporate" labs (including Essilor Laboratories of America) is from within the employee base. In an employee-vested environment, the laboratory workers have the biggest incentive of all to run a solid lab- if the lab fails, they lose both an investment and possibly a job!
I agree that it is nice to do business with a non-corporate company. There used to be a little hardware shop in Lancaster that I enjoyed visiting when I needed a hose or something for the lab. However, I'd be lying if I said I don't find the "large box" hardware stores (Lowes, Home Depot) terribly convenient, competitively priced, and well-stocked to meet my needs. Precisely because they are larger, they can afford to be open longer hours, carry a greater variety of products, and they have policies that are very clear and basically customer-friendly...
Pete Hanlin, ABOM
Vice President Professional Services
Essilor of America
http://linkedin.com/in/pete-hanlin-72a3a74
I would say that small independants vs corp. do not compare as lancaster hardware vs Lowes.
For instance Essilor labs cannot get my Hoya lenses and Hoya cannot get my Essilor lenses. My local independant can get both, and with bells on... And thats just one example.
Last edited by Pete Hanlin; 05-03-2004 at 02:58 PM.
There are people who still dispense Hoya products? :o Just kidding...
Lowe's doesn't carry every brand Home Depot does either, but either of them have all sorts of services that aren't necessarily available from the Mom & Pop stores that I fondly remember (e.g., installation, store-specific credit programs, etc., etc.).
I think its important to point out that the analogy holds up in other areas which may favor the independent lab in some regards as well. Are you more likely to find a helpful (perhaps even more knowledgeable) person at the smaller hardware store? Probably. However, it varies from store to store. The local Lowe's has a couple awesome guys I've worked with from time to time in the plumbing and counters departments- the trick is getting to the store when they're there (I've also had to leave the store and come back another day because there was simply no one available to help me with the particular project of the day). Even this issue is being taken care of, however. My understanding is you will soon be able to speak to an expert via the company website for any project you are undertaking.
While I agree that competition is good, I think the industry is undeniably moving in favor of larger lab networks. In house AR is becoming almost a necessity- and the fastest growing ARs are integrated SRC/ARCs (like Crizal or SHV) which require a considerable investment. Additionally, the equipment being developed today is designed for very high output (a robotic LOH chunks a pair of lenses out in what- a minute?). At the same time, managed care is reducing the profitability per job in many cases- which tilts the balance even more in favor to the lab with the better economy of scale.
The laboratory with a few hundred jobs per day is getting squeezed tighter and tighter. Additionally, with the various air freight vendors in the US, a laboratory in Kentucky can plop a job into a Texas office next day- so the convenience factor of the local lab is diminishing as well (although I used to use a lab that delivered jobs right to my door- twice a day... that WAS nice).
That may be the point. As products become more complex, expensive, company specific, etc., the independent lab that will survive will have to do so by specializing (IMO). Either that, or they will need to form partnerships/alliances with one company or another (Sola, Hoya, Essilor, etc.).
Well I can get Essilor, Sola, Rodenstock, Nikon, Signet Armorlite, Zeiss, AO, and Seiko from my Essilor lab. If I tried to get Hoya Lenses I could probably get them too.
I think that just because independants are often run by ma and pa, it doesn't nessecarily mean their product is ma and pa.
Until that mega lab loses a key person or key machine. Happens everyday.While I agree that competition is good, I think the industry is undeniably moving in favor of larger lab networks.
Yes and no. No more than before actually...The laboratory with a few hundred jobs per day is getting squeezed tighter and tighter.
We do that.Additionally, with the various air freight vendors in the US, a laboratory in Kentucky can plop a job into a Texas office next day- so the convenience factor of the local lab is diminishing as well (although I used to use a lab that delivered jobs right to my door- twice a day... that WAS nice).
I think the product has always been specialized to a point. Ma and Pa Are better at that. Independants I have noticed are forming partnerships with each other, and that is new and different.That may be the point. As products become more complex, expensive, company specific, etc., the independent lab that will survive will have to do so by specializing (IMO). Either that, or they will need to form partnerships/alliances with one company or another (Sola, Hoya, Essilor, etc.).
I think In house AR is overrated, because it takes too long in the first place. And then they keep adding ar features that take longer.
Call and ask about Hoya availability then and let us know. I'll bet you could get the non essilor product at a more affordable price from an independant, and they actually might stock it as well.
I just phoned my lab (and hence probably teeing off the girl who I talked to), she said I can get Hoya products, but it will probably take longer, no returns, and a little more expensive, like you said.
edit - by in house AR, do you mean products other than Crizal, Alize, HCC, Sola Teflon?
Sure... Sooner or later everyone will have an AR machine. look to a new thread I will post later on about that, and how the future of AR looks... all the same.
Well I know several dispenseries in my area who deal with indy labs (this isn't about indy labs) who use in house AR, and that stuff is **** for lack of a better term. I think the consumer is better off without AR if they are going to get that. Half the time when I sell AR I have to talk them into it, because they had that stuff. It doesn't clean, it comes off very easily, and it gives AR a bad name. Actually, RF99 is better than that stuff. Now I don't know if that pertained to all in house AR, but three stores in my area are dispensing this stuff.
Yeah, I know what you mean. Out here in Cali a little revolution is quietly happening though. I'll put it in a thread soon enouph.
A lot of the in-house AR units involve placing an AR coating over an existing scratch coating. This process for ARC simply doesn't result in as durable a product as an integrated SRC/ARC. Integrated systems are available through Essilor (I don't know if Hoya makes their system available to independents or not) in the form of Crizal EXT. Essilor also drives business into the independent by advertising and otherwise promoting the brand with ECPs and consumers.
In my opinion, products like these (AR, super-high index) are going to result in independent laboratories forming partnerships with one manufacturer or another. The development and promotion of new technologies is dependent upon the financial resources of a manufacturer, and the distribution of these products is dependent upon the cooperation of independent distributors. Its a formula for strategic partnerships.
As for product quality, there's nothing wrong with mom & pop quality- I'd much rather eat at a local diner than a fastfood chain, the quality of the food is usually better. However, a network of laboratories is going to have an ongoing advantage due to their resources. Using the same example, wherever you go, there will be a Burger King nearby and you can depend on a certain list of items being on the menu. If you decide you like Whoppers, you know that any Burger King in any location is going to be able to give you a Whopper at a particular price in a particular amount of time at a quality level similar to that found at other Burger Kings.
Pete Hanlin, ABOM
Vice President Professional Services
Essilor of America
http://linkedin.com/in/pete-hanlin-72a3a74
Pete, along that line, I can recall that TSO(Texas State Optical) was a powerful force in the Texas market, right up until they franchised their stores to the OD's. Then the stores just became an "independent" shop with TSO over the door. they carried different products, had different pricing, and were basically run independently. Ultimately, they went into bankruptcy. they have come out of that, I believe, but they will never be what they were as a 'chain'.
I can think of several equal examples of succesful chain in name only organizations.
Well I don't know about your labs, but we ma and pa folk try not to ship whoppers, and so far our customers appreciate it.If you decide you like Whoppers, you know that any Burger King in any location is going to be able to give you a Whopper at a particular price in a particular amount of time at a quality level similar to that found at other Burger Kings.
MRBA
CEO
Burger King:hammer:
Last edited by mrba; 05-05-2004 at 08:02 PM.
Round here where such establishments ain't run by the same people they were when they started out, you'd be supprised how much fast food can vary in quality and service time whilst dem jive talkers tries to "work".
Now once you gits Nawth of Memphis things tends to improve.
Chip
I'm with a HOYA lab. Yes, we have been through some changes. I must say some not so good, but for the majority, GOOD! Better benefits and work environment.
hmmmm look how many "views" there are for this forum
We used to have a good lab here in Denver, but since Essilor took it over its pretty much gone in the toilet. They've gone from running 2 shifts down to 1 shift. And according to a friend that still works there they are having a hard time keeping one shift busy.
First, they squeezed out the old management group. Then they brought in some yahoo from out of state who managed to squeeze out other key people on the floor and in customer service.
Needless to say they don't get any of our business anymore. So I now use my local Walmans for anything I absolutely have to have right away.
I hope you are all having fun & making money!!
I work for a small independent lab and am always amazed at how the focus of product mix changes when a buyout occurs. I understand, of course, that a lens manufacturer will always promote their designs above all others when they own the lab but I still chuckle when a lab rep has to change stories in mid stream. If an account is sold on a one brand fits all theory than a manufacturer owned lab may be the best choice. The theory being if all you have is a hammer then everything looks like a nail.
To me the value of an independent lab is in our variety of product to meet a specific need and not to only promote a specific variety. We have to partner with our accounts to offer the best visual solutions, no matter the design. We are a lens buffet rather than a one meal special. All labs have problems from time to time in customer service, turn around time, and quality but so do dispensers. As long as we have real people making custom products we will make real mistakes. We can only try to improve and learn to work together, independent or manufacturer owned.
Lab Rep,
Are you submitting that possibly a corparate owned lab would be inclined to direct an account to the one size fits all lens, over sombody elses lens that would be more apropriate?
That is quite an accusation. I have noticed that "other" lens vendors cost more than the house lens at these labs... But it could just be circumstantial.
Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. I don't want to get into a lens design battle but one manufactures short corridor lens will have more distortion in the distance for example -vs- another manufactures short corridor. At the same time one may have a larger intermediate or near zone than the other. So again it comes back to which is the best visual solution for a particucular patient's needs. That should be our foremost concern.
I will always argue that a first time wearer can adapt to and be happy with almost any lens made because they have no basis for comparison. But if you bring a patient up from say a NSNL to a Zeiss Individual, there is a world of difference. It is not that the NSNL was a bad lens it's just that we now have so many better choices. It is black and white TV -vs- color.
Lens designs are changing rapidly and I along with alot of other people are tired of trying to keep up, but we must.
While it is true that there is no such thing as a perfect design there are better designs. Why limit or compromise your patients visual needs to one manufacter?
Just keep your opinions to yourself around here. I couldn't have said it better, but there are those that dispense with the theory "It has never given me a problem" so that means it must be good.
And such is life. If it ain't broke don't fix it but a new Ford Thunderbird rides much better than a '57. We would call that a collectors item now but some are still offering patients patients an antique lens design with the promise of a futuristic ride. ???
Why do we continue to offer the old models?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks